| Abstract: | Two quasi‐experimental studies were conducted to examine the equivalence of an online unsupervised test battery (ICES ability, interests and personality tests) in relation to supervised paper administration and to test whether differences were because of the lack of supervision, the test being online as opposed to on a PC, or the computerization of the test. In the first study, data from a sample of 86 employed individuals suggested a lack of equivalence on ability scales between online unsupervised and paper supervised testing modes. Effect sizes ranged from .04 to .49 and corrected coefficients of equivalence and stability from .65 to .81. Study two used a more controlled design as well as obtaining data on personality and interest scales. Data from 118 college and university students were collected, with 64 students replicating the design in study 1 and 54 tested in supervised paper and supervised PC modes. For the ability scales, a similar pattern to study 1 was seen between supervised paper and unsupervised online testing as well as between supervised paper and supervised PC testing. Data for interest and personality scales were more positive showing lower effect sizes and higher coefficient values across testing modes. When ability test data from the online testing group were compared with data from the PC group, results showed that the scales were affected by the computerization process rather than the lack of supervision or because they were in online as opposed to PC mode. |
